World must not abandon Afghanistan after combat mission ends, says UK ambassador

British and American troops fighting in Afghanistan "should get out now" if the world's major powers are not prepared to continue backing the Afghan government after combat operations end in 2014, according to Britain's ambassador in Kabul.

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Sir William Patey, 58, who finishes his posting at the end of the week, said the world would be making a "monumental historical mistake" if it did not continue to provide financial and other support to Afghanistan following the 2014 deadline.

Nato combat forces are due to complete their withdrawal by the end of 2014, when security for the country will be handed over to Afghan security forces. Mr Patey, who previously served as Britain's ambassador to Iraq, predicted that Afghanistan "will still be a bit messy" when the withdrawal is completed, but insisted that the country "will not be on the point of collapse".

An international conference on the future of Afghanistan is to be hosted by Nato in Chicago in May, when donor nations will be asked to contribute $4.3 billion (£2.7 billion) a year after 2014 to maintain the country's reconstruction effort after three decades of incessant conflict. Washington has indicated that it is prepared to contribute £1.75 billion, with the remainder coming from Europe and other states, such as Japan and Australia, that are currently supporting the Nato mission.

The British Government says it is prepared to contribute £62.5 million to the fund, but there are concerns that other countries, such as France, are proving reluctant to maintain their involvement in Afghanistan beyond the 2014 deadline.

Mr Patey said that the success of Britain's policy of withdrawing its troops and leaving Afghanistan in a stable state "is totally dependent on the international community to bankroll the Afghans for a number of years to come".

"If we are not prepared to do that then we should get out now. If the international community loses the will we will be making a monumental mistake. It is not a lot of money when you imagine what we have spent already," he said.

At present the American military spends £7.5 billion a year in Afghanistan, while Britain's contribution is about £2.1 billion.

Concerns about Afghanistan becoming a safe haven for al-Qaeda terrorists after 2014 have re-surfaced following the recent spate of shootings in the Toulouse area of France by an al-Qaeda gunman who is reported to have trained in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar – the former stronghold of the Taliban – and Pakistan.

Mr Patey said that the Taliban "are not looking as though they want to engage in reconciliation", although he said it was unlikely that "the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will be restored" once Nato forces have ended their combat mission.

But he admitted that the biggest obstacle to securing future international funding for Afghanistan was the widespread corruption that continues to afflict the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The international community was partly to blame for the corruption because, in the past, it had donated billions of pounds to Afghanistan without being diligent about how it was spent.

Mr Patey, who caused controversy when his valedictory diplomatic cable from Iraq, which criticised Tony Blair's involvement there, was made public, said the West's involvement in the Iraq war was partly to blame for the current problems it faced in Afghanistan.

"We wasted five years here while we were messing around in Iraq," he said.

Mr Patey, who is retiring from the Diplomatic Service, played down suggestions that recent controversies involving Nato troops, such as the Koran-burning incident in Kandahar, pictures of American soldiers urinating on dead Taliban fighters and the shooting of 16 innocent Afghan civilians by a US soldier, would cause any lasting damage to the Nato effort.

Similar incidents may re-occur, he said, but "will be seen as small bumps in history".